This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/02/15, 04:01 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

zombii wrote:

As usual, these articles avoid (or gloss over) the fundamental core of Christianity—at least in the way most Europeans respond to it. That core being the notion that “man” has an immortal soul and IT WILL be judged by the supreme source. These aspects play into the traditional European concepts of universal truth, accounting for ones’ deeds, justice, retribution, eternal being.

Apart from variant Egyptian/Euro-pagan thought, no other culture or religious tradition even comes close to having the same level of appealing metaphysical properties to the European soul… nor do they have the track-record (i.e. Hinduism created India) to preach to Europeans.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/02/15, 02:27 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Richard Spencer's hobbies over humans wrote:

We shall propose instead, Cuckingservative: (one who poses and presents BS that would cause others to be cucked unbeknownst) e.g., Richard Spencer - Cuckoled of the bookbag Paul Gottfried.

Paul Gottfried is Richard Spencer’s puppet master who is determinedly averse to a White Left for his Jewish reasons.

I admit to a distaste for Richard Spencer from the get-go for the faggy way that he talks, but his hubris (“intellectuals like me”), his kowtowing to right-wing money (Regnery), pandering to philo Germanic overcompensation and Jews, confirms Lurker correct to place Radix among controlled oppositon.

Lana: Now I wanted to ask you this (sigh) “left vs right”, I hear so many people in altmedia saying “I’m beyond that” but is it even truly possible because everything in our world is about opposing forces, even our brain has two hemispheres; so can we be beyond “left and right.”

Richrd Spencer: laughs, “wow, uh, that’s a very good way of thinking about it. I think there are probably two levels to thith. I think there’s the superficial level..and that’s the kind of thing where you take these stupid Facebook quizzes and they’ll tell you who you are kind of thing, like uh, ‘do you support abortion, do you support environmental regulations, do you support the Iraq war? oooh, we’ve determined you’re a centrist liberal or something like that. I think ..

In terms of that, these stupid slide rules, we are definitely beyond that kind of nonsense. And as I’ve said, we should never think of ourselves as ‘conservatives only more-so.’ You know, Mike Huckabee on steroids”...

Lana: confused giggle sound.

Richard Thpenther: that’s the last thing we want to be. I think we’re definitly beyond left and right in that sense.

..but I agree with what you’re saying that there almost needs to be a tension to us and I think that’s a very intersting idea and I can kind of go back to what I was saying about the neo-conservatives - why they are an interesting movement..

..is because they actually have a tension in there, that there’s a tension in there between American nationalism and Jewish Zionism…and a kind of global, you know, democratic universalism…and they’re kind of fighting between those energies…within their hearts

You said it, cowering before your Jewish and other right-wing idiot cohorts where you haven’t hid away on the ski and bike trails of Montana.

Richard Spencer: But there is something of that Faustian soul that you can see in Stanley Kuberick (Jew)‘s “2001”, that desire to transcend ourselves, and I think there is a tension to go back and forth between traditionalism on the one hand and a kind of Faustian spirit on the other.

The left is supposed to be quaint and tame White people attending to the little things while Jews lead the way in “Fuastian spirt.”

Richard Spencer: I think that’s a really productive tension, that makes us better and I think that could be the kind of “left / right” divide of the future.

This fool is now presenting himself as the master of discourse (telling us how to define the left/ right divide for his convenience) when all he is really showing is that he is mastered.

Richard Spencer: and I think that could be the great “left / right” dialectic of the future.

Lana: I like that, very good.

Richard Spencer: Whereas the “grand strategy” would be to be a “social justice warrior”...its funny, you know, I see a lot of myself in my paternal grandfather, he was a big bourbon drinker… these are little things, but in a way kind of telling things.. I like that…once 9:30 P.M. hits I like to get my glass and get a good bourbon and maybe do a little bit of work and read a bit, maybe look outside… I kind of have his mentality.

Lana: there are certain nuances in European culture that I never want to see go, like table manners or chivalry.. certain aspects that I love and it would be so sad to see that disappear.

Richard Spencer: oh yeah, absolutely, this gets back to what I was talking about, the left / right of the future, there’s gonna be this tension between our Faustian nature and our traditional nature, our idea for little things, you know, little ways of doing things that are inefficient, actually

Leave efficiency to the Jews and those they buy-off. Good idea - not!

Back to somthing that Spencer said in the earlier part of the podcast:

Spencer: we need to think about the right in American and to some extent in Europe, though I think they have more similarities than they actually do differences, its a jigsaw puzzle where the pieces don’t fit. .. so one of the things that our movement can do is to start to think what are the pieces of our soul .. I think that without question, something we should think about and I think we should do more than think about it is the importance of the natural world to us… we shouldn’t just preserve it as a natural resource or due to environmentalism, we should support it….for aesthetic grounds, for spiritual grounds, as a place for renewal..one of the fundamenal reasons why I live in Montana is that I can look out and be inspired by living in a place in the mountains, by going into the forest, swimming in the lakes (laughs), biking through the trees, these are things that are just deeply important, they are more important than humans

Get that? This right-wing elitist idiot thinks his hobbies are more important than humans.

There you have it, underscoring the inherent instability of the right. That is the kind of pefidy and hubris you can expect from these sorts, who think they are better, who think they should be our leaders.

There’s also a salient example of the right’s inherent insability that the interviewer, Lana, let slip months ago in her video “St. George and The White Whore” (quite good until the very end, at minute 1:14:27, adding spuriously):

“Hitler tried to take back German lands in Poland that were annexed by The Soviet Union and what ultimately happened? The world descended upon millions of innocent Germans with bombs.”

Do you believe that she would try to pass that shit-off?

No thanks, Lana

The right is susceptible to ask you to accept all kinds of egregious BS, including anti-human, anti social, earthy crunchy “natural” muslix mixed with Hitler’s dingleberries; or propose things like Odinism (lets pass on that one, Arnold, comment 12) with its idiotic mandate to go and kill and die for a maiden in valhalla as if that’s a lot better at serving our racial group interests than Islam and its virgins in heaven.

Now Richard and Lana try to define “the left” as table manners and the little things not troubled with “big things” - that’s for Jews and other Neo-cons.

Yeah sure, I’ll listen to you two, let you frame the terms of discussion - not.

No thanks Richard

Have another bourbon made of GMO corn. Have several. You need it and deserve it.

Have a few with your cucking-servative benefactors.

There is perhaps a final note of irony in placing nature beyond humans in that the Whitefish, Montana surrounds (that you value-so) stand to be vaporized by the Yellowstone supervolcno.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/02/15, 03:34 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Arnold wrote:

CHRISTIANITY IS THE CANCER OF THE WHITE RACE—IT IS TIME TO GET OUT OF IT.

Thanks for the great post, Sir. I am so glad people are starting to realize that Christianity is the problem. The entire death of the white race is caused by the Judaists (Jews), who have infiltrated Christianity and are using it to control the goyim.

For over 100,000 years, our white ancestors thrived and culture developed, because they worshiped God and nature. Around 300 AD, the criminal emperor Constantine, who killed his own son and multiple relatives, imposed on Europe the manufactured religion of Christianity based on Egyptian (and therefore African) mythology which Eusebius then called the “Old Testament.”

Since then, there has been constant decay, death, and destruction of the white race, due to its belief in African myths of the Old Testament, the adulation of the adherents of the barbaric African beliefs and rituals of the Torah (OT) and the Talmud (called the “Jews”) and worship of the criminal African God Yahweh. See:

Therefore, it is time for Whites to leave this toxic and deadly African cult called Christianity (and Judaism) and return to the peaceful religions of our ancestors—paganism, Odonism, etc. which our ancestors followed for over 100,000 years or possibly Deism.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/01/15, 11:20 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Kumiko Oumae wrote:

Well, what Indigo is asking is pretty simple to address, the concerns that he has are basically the wrong concerns:

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
Sharing the wealth is a Christian doctrine and those that follow the words of Jesus should be generous.

Redistributive welfare policies are not the sole preserve of Christianity, and in the case where Christian notions of generocity arise they are flawed in three ways:

Christians connect their ‘generocity’ with conditions which encourage more people to convert to Christianity, which in turn causes more harm than good because the momentary gain that is accrued from the redistribution is lost in later generations as the inherently destructive effects of orientating society around an anti-racialist and anti-nationalist ideology brings down the whole population group.

Christian ‘charity’ groups, when acting as third sector organisations, often have incomplete data and a proselyting agenda which causes them to target their spending in ways that are unhelpful, insufficient, or actually harmful to the society that they are trying to ‘help’. There are also cases where Christian charity unwittingly helps to prop up deplorable social systems which ought to have been overthrown in revolution if it were not for the ameliorating effects of their ‘charity’. It competes against actual revolutionary groups that share nationalist or regionalist values and goals.

Christian ‘charity’ groups do not discriminate and view all human life as being of equal worth. This leads to absurdities like—for example—Christians trying to save foetuses that no one wants with large sums of money, when that money might instead have been better targeted toward education of children that people actually wanted to have.

What is necessary is that priorities and goals should be drafted up by the state, and spending programmes should be used to advance those goals in a properly organised way where everything is properly costed. This would be done because when it comes to administrating a state, one would want to keep citizens healthy and with a basic guaranteed income so as to ensure that in the case of war or civil strife, the working class of a nation would be willing to stand with the government against a common outside enemy, and fit enough to actualise that solidarity.

Even the basest and most self-interested warlord-clans have historically made these kinds of pro-redistributive decisions, if only to preserve the hegemony of their own class. How much more easily would an advanced society in the modern era make that same calculation?

Christian doctrines based on mawkish, indiscriminate, and universalised sentimentality would not be required to make that happen.

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
The Beggar will not waste his time in the Yiddish ghetto

No one should ever waste time in a Yiddish ghetto.

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
but will stand close to a church building to experience Christian charity.

Yes, indeed. See North Africans in Italy, for example. How are you liking that?

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
The poor would never have gotten proper medical treatment if those loyal to the words of Jesus were not present.

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
Hitler was an Atheist who despised Christianity,

Okay. And? What does that have to do with this?

indigoxxx1 on July 30, 2015 wrote:
many heathens would like to witness the genocide of the poor and indignant.

You use the word ‘genocide’, but it doesn’t mean what you think it means. ‘Genocide’ does not mean “refusing to spend money on people that the Christians want you to spend it on, in the way that they want you to spend it”.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/01/15, 12:07 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

This essay is a ground-breaking resource.

Kumiko has uncovered a rosetta stone of Judaic “jurisdiction” which exposes the academic campaign against “White privilege” as a pseudo justification to pillage White men of EVERYTHING that is theirs.

She has exposed the connection of Judaic law which provides that if the gentiles have stolen what they have then it is valid, in turn, to take from them what they have stolen.

Hence the Jewish motivation to “build a case” that Whites have stolen all they have, through “White privilege”, so that what they have is “justifiably” stolen from them in turn - not merely material resources, but everything, ranging from their natural habitat, territory, history of ideas, mind and their very co-evoluton is conceived as stolen through “white privilege” in order to ‘justify” Jewish theft and pillage; and for the groups Jews allege and deploy as aggrieved “victims” of White privilege, to pillage all that Whites have.

Blacks, such as Rudwaan quoted in the essay, are being trained to follow this Talmudic, turned Marxist, turned cultural Marxist notion to believe that they have justification to take any resource that Whites have, even to take their co-evolutionary females, even rape White women, even murder arbitrary Whites. That is ostensibly justified by “white privilege”, which is…

“...passed on to their offspring and subsequent generations who from a position of abject ignorance of their past operate under the sanitized illusion of ‘privilege’ when in fact they are benefactors of rape and pillage”

........................

I’ve minor quibbles with the essay tracing a bit too dark a path of Christianity as it made its way through ancient Rome and in line with that enunciation, taking a Nietzschean perspective to criticize its quantitative detriment to the “strong” as opposed to its advocacy of “the weak.”* Underscoring this course and these effects unnecessarily engages groan worthy, typically right-wing, elitist arguments at the expense of nationalism on solid ground of qualitative, horizontal, ecological niche differences (differences which could be ensconced in reasonably humanitarian White left nationalism) - which I hasten to add are in no way adverse to those who are doing well and better - on the contrary, would provide for their amenable grounds.

* Witness how that right wing angle needlessly opened up a moral argument for commentor number 1 above, that would have been done away with from the onset by a White Left perspective.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/01/15, 10:49 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

This comment appeared in entry '(What would have been) questions for Dr Frank Salter' on 08/01/15, 09:46 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

neil vodavzny wrote:

It may be splitting hairs but Christ’s bloodline was Moab originating from Ruth. Bloodlines also figure in Mary Magdaleine (the da Vinci Code).
These romantic myths seem to have blended with European paganism. Christianity replaced the Mithraic cult, another sungod from Persia, adopted by the Romans (also with a Trinity).
I feel this gave Christianity a fantasy element you find in Milton’s Paradise Lost and others. The fact that Christianity is imported then adapted made it amenable to European invention.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/01/15, 09:27 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Kumiko Oumae wrote:

Have you actually read into the religion that you are defending, Harry? I’ll spell it out for you:

The Jews do not ‘loathe’ Christianity, they find it ridiculous, and they sometimes have tensions with Christians as a result.

When you make the Judaic religion into your own superego, you will find yourself driven to compete against the Jews for control over who is the ‘true heir’ to Judaic thought, and to Jerusalem, because of the Jews’ apparent ‘deicide’ committed by their refusal to acknowledge the seamless continuum from Mount Sinai to Calvary. I propose that you shouldn’t be acknowledging Mount Sinai in the first place.

Christianity supports the idea that ‘salvation is from the Jews’ (John 4:22), and that those who are not Jews are one undifferentiated mass called ‘gentiles’. So Jews get to exist so long as they are not Christians (ie, always), but under Christianity all races are supposed to cease to exist, if you actually follow what it tells you to do. In practice this means that Jews get to exist since obviously they will not convert to Christianity, and everyone else stops existing because you will ask them to convert to Christianity. Congratulations. (Galations 3:26-28)

When Jesus of Nazareth criticises the Pharisees, he is taking part in an in-house family quarrel, a tradition of internal criticism which was going on at that time. The reason that it appears so harsh is because Jesus adhered to the positions of the Hillel Rabbinic school, whereas many of the ‘opponents’ he encountered seemed to be of the Shammai Rabbinic School. Thus, the rhetoric would be very heated. The volume of things which they all agreed on though, was far larger than the isolated issues that they disagreed on, as would be expected. The things which they all agreed on simply were left unspoken, because they didn’t need to say it.

Jesus of Nazareth believed that some of the oral laws being followed by the Pharisees were not in alignment with the written law. But he definitely supported the written law of Judaism. That’s why he said that he had come to fulfil the law of the Jewish prophets ‘so as to accomplish their purpose’ by the back door. (Matthew 5:17-18)

Jesus of Nazareth consciously imitated the scathing language of the Old Testament prophets in his confrontations with Jews, because that kind of language would give him the commanding presence of one of those prophets. To argue that Jesus of Nazareth was ‘anti-Jewish’ in some way just because he used scathing language on the ones that disagreed with him in debates and in geopolitical manoeuvring inside the territory of Herod Antipas, is ridiculous. It is ridiculous for the same reason that arguing that Moses, or Isaiah, or Ezekiel, or pretty much any of them you could care to name, supposedly “did the Jews no favours”, because they engaged in very harsh constructive criticism of the Jews. Since when is Jews asking other Jews to become more consistent Jews or die, a ‘dis-favour’ to Jews? Never, that’s when.

So really, how the actual fuck can you seriously be claiming that Christianity is ‘the antithesis’ of Judaism? You Christians essentially are the Jew. Or at least pseudo-Jews.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 08/01/15, 04:36 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Harry wrote:

The ‘What kind of Jew are you’ image is fundamentally flawed and I’m afraid shows a lack of understanding of the Bible story. Regardless, generally speaking Jews loathe Christianity and particularly Jesus. As such I’m always extremely wary of those peddling articles such as the above. The New Testament does Judaism no favours at all. Quite the reverse actually.

Of course that’s not to say that much of the Christian world hasn’t been deceived in some way. There’s Catholicism with its pagan undertones and much of the Protestant world is in the grip of the dispensationalist view of the world. Christianity, properly understood, is the antithesis of what we face.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 07/31/15, 11:59 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

Rather than seeing it as a friendly tap on the shoulder from those sharing his own fundamental group interests, the Cuckservative prefers to see it as an emanation from the Left or even a psy-ops from the camp of Hillary Clinton, aimed at tarring him as an evil “racist” and “sexist,” when “everyone knows that it’s the Democrats who are the real racists and sexists..” Yes, the unmistakable cry of the clueless cuck rings through the forest once again! - Duns Scotus, Alternative Right

In response to which, I would ask:

Is calling someone an “a-hole” a friendly tap on the shoulder?

A person deserves to be called an a-hole or they do not.

We usually call a person an “a-hole” when they are screwing others even though they don’t have to. That would be the case of one doing the cucking (characteristic of right-wingers), not usually the cuckolded.

Sometimes, in the case of people trying to seem tough, like “alphas” and above it all (above race) liberals, they will call someone an “a-hole” when they are letting themselves be abused when the don’t have to be. That’s the more rare use of term “a-hole” and it should be, as it’s more like blaming the victim.

To be cuckold is to be more like the victim and to call them cuckold is to use the second, rarer form of “a-hole”, while taking attention away first kind; the invocation of which would entail racial empathy and solidarity for the victim while taking aim at the first kind of a-hole - victimizers of racial solidarity.

Thus, calling people “cuckolds” is not, for the most part, a friendly tap on the shoulder. Although a friendly tap on the shoulder should be the first strategy with regard to consciousness-raising of those Whites who are being scewed, i.e., not by their own conscious chioce, who are in need of the concept of racial solidarity.

Absent these distinctions, chiding others as “cuckservatives” is basically coming from a liberal position, prone to blame White men, adding to the liberal pool of incitement, the toxic water in which we swim. These are toxic waters which, for decades now, have been chemically balanced to poison normal White men and take the heat-off of puerile females and the Jewish source of liberal pandering to them.

But I can relate to getting behind a term like “cuckolding-servative” as that would place empahsis on the first kind fo a-hole, the victimizer; thus, rather than getting into the Stockholm syndrom of identifying with our victimizers, would turn critical attention more to where it should be, on the victimizers.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 07/30/15, 05:49 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Kumiko Oumae wrote:

That chart more or less exactly sums up the article’s basic point. It’s like all of those religions are a series of developments stemming directly from one Judaic root, recognising and revering that same tyrannical desert-god.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 07/30/15, 03:44 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

which kind of J are they? wrote:

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 07/30/15, 12:22 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

indigoxxx1 wrote:

Sharing the wealth is a Christian doctrine and those that follow the words of Jesus should be generous. The Beggar will not waste his time in the Yiddish ghetto but will stand close to a church building to experience Christian charity. The poor would never have gotten proper medical treatment if those loyal to the words of Jesus were not present. Hitler was an Atheist who despised Christianity, many heathens would like to witness the genocide of the poor and indignant.

This comment appeared in entry ''White privilege' as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.' on 07/30/15, 11:38 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Golden Dawn from the horse's mouth wrote:

Giorgos (George), editor for the website of the New York division of Golden Dawn:

The interests of Asia and those of the North Atlantic, fit together and complement each other.

Hmmm. Do they really?

This comment appeared in entry 'North Atlantic: You Have Spread Your Dreams Under Their Feet' on 07/28/15, 04:28 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

DanielS wrote:

It’s a good idea to use this as a wedge issue.

Queers are a very small part of our populations and clearly a practical place to make a concession (since their small presence is inevitable) when choosing a side to take in order to exploit a contradiction in liberalism and drive a wedge against Islam.

We can freak-out the Mulims, cause significant consternation in the liberal world view and crucially, wedge against “conservatives” altogether as they are, as you say, conserving liberalism and universalism, e.g., through Christianity.

This comment appeared in entry 'Paul Weston arrested for reciting Churchill speech about Muslims' on 07/28/15, 01:34 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Kumiko Oumae wrote:

Speaking of wedge issues, this is another wedge issue that is coming up just north of where Weston is, and which has been developing for a while now. There is the fact that the ‘gay rights’ issue has evolved to the stage where ‘gay rights’ are now associated with what they call ‘white privilege’, because Muslims don’t like gay people and so rubbing it in their faces is now considered to be a form of oppression directed against what they regard as a marginalised group.

However, angry left wing and gay rights activists have taken to Facebook, denouncing the planned pride march as “right wing”, “xenophobic” and “pure racism”.

A counter-demonstration is now planned, with organisers claiming Järva Pride “pits two oppressed groups against one another.”

Taxpayer-funded gay rights group RFSL has distanced itself from the pride march, accusing it of promoting racism and white privilege, while some activists are even calling for the organisers to be arrested for “hate speech”. [...]

Of course, it is difficult to understand how Muslims could be an oppressed or marginalised group, considering that they hold institutional power in a whole region of the world called ‘MENA’ (Middle East and North Africa), and have a large population of adherents as well as being one of the world’s largest and most overbearingly oppressive religions. A religion which asserts that all other gods are ‘false’, other than their own.

The fact that there is a situation where the liberal establishment is defending that religion in European lands, shows how far the Overton Window has been dragged.

This comment appeared in entry 'Paul Weston arrested for reciting Churchill speech about Muslims' on 07/28/15, 01:07 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Finns Party MP Olli Immonen’s Facebook page on Saturday. The slogan on the banner calls for “A Finnish Finland”.

The leader of the populist Finns Party has so far remained silent after a prominent MP called on his followers to “fight until the end” against the “nightmare called multiculturalism”.

Olli Immonen, member of parliament for the northern Finnish town of Oulu, posted his remarks in English on Friday night on Facebook and on the website of the nationalist organisation Suomen Sisu, of which he is the chair.

The MP, an outspoken opponent of immigration who on his website describes the need to fight the “Islamification” of Finland, predicted in his post “‘The ugly bubble that our enemies live in will soon enough burst into a million little pieces.” He added that “We will fight until the end for our homeland and one true Finnish nation.”

The remarks drew widespread condemnation from other politicians, who accused him of inciting hatred. However the 29-year-old’s own party leader, Timo Soini, who is also the country’s foreign minister, has so far been unavailable for comment.

Paul says,“Nationalism isn’t, as you say, “an infinitely malleable idea”, but it does have various interpretations, broadly divided into ethnic and civic nationalism.”

DavidPeppiat:

Civic nationalism is not part of the nationalist Weltanschauung. It is part of the liberal Weltanschauung. It is (a minor) one of the massifying tendencies therein. The dividing line between the two worlds is that between blood, the organic, the particular, and the idea, the artificial, the general. If you have read, say, Hegel on liberalism, or Nietzsche, Heidegger, Carl Schmitt, you will know what I am trying to say (not very well, I fear).

Paul:..“why I describe ethnic nationalism as “impractical” is that, difficult as it is to locate ourselves within a culture or a community, most of us don’t know or care enough about our ancestry to locate ourselves at all within a race.”

DavidPeppiat

You are complaining about the contrivances of liberalism, not about nationalism. In nationalist thinking, the psychological products of the life that is now lived in the West - hyper-individualism, alienation, self-estrangement, ethno-masochism, etc - are understood to take us all away from our natural identity and life-interest, and into a contrived circumstance (of which much is generated philosophically and politically by an extremely hostile culture of critique). In a healthy society - one with a quietist ethnic nationalism informing Power - there are the counter-forces of self-consciousness, solidarity, and heritage to guide you. We don’t have these as things are, and that’s why you can’t comprehend their “practicality”. You are thinking like the liberal you are, obviously.

Paul:A shared identity that can only be proved by tests in a laboratory whose validity is discounted by many scientists is never going to be a sound foundation for a community, let alone for a polity.

DavidPeppiat:

No, belonging is more openly available to the understanding than that. Suppose that you traced your lineage back to, say, Elizabethan times, noting every single branch however remote. Then suppose you turn-about and trace the lines of all those branches, right down to the present. You would have a human bloom probably a million strong. That’s what kinship, people- hood, connectedness means. It isn’t difficult to apprehend.

The past year saw some of the most ruthless Israeli attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza since the territories were occupied in 1967. Israeli political leaders incited violence against Palestinians and soldiers and civilians carried out these commands, while the government’s parallel war on African refugees raged on.

What follows is the third annual list of racist ringleaders who have championed Israel’s efforts to drive all non-Jewish African asylum-seekers — a community of 50,000 men, women and children — out of the country and back to the tortures from which they fled in sub-Saharan Africa.

This comment appeared in entry 'African Population Explosion - Augurs to Overwhelm Europe' on 07/27/15, 09:49 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Dresden attacked by night, bio-weapon wrote:

Residents Wake up to Find Overnight, City Park Has Been Turned Into Migrant Camp For 2,000

The German city which dared to stand-up to their government’s policy of accepting Islamisation and mass migration appears to have been punished for dissent by the zero-notice imposition of a migrant camp.

Government employees stood by the entrance of a city park in Dresden, Saxony on Thursday night handing out fliers to passers-by informing them the next day the green space, which lies a short walk behind the city’s famous Semper Opera house was to be transformed into a ‘tent city’. In reality, a Breitbart source in the city said, the first most people knew about the plan was when a convoy of lorries and construction equipment rolled in to begin work hours later.
Dresden Refugee Camp

Bulldozers worked throughout the night to clear away grass and to pull up trees to make the park ready to receive the large white marquees provided by the German Red Cross to house some 1,100 refugees. That was the number, at least, that residents were given when the plans were announced. Within hours of the first migrants arriving on Saturday, the number the city-centre camp was expected to house had already been uprated to 2,000.

At the same time the gender and age makeup of the camp was announced, giving an interesting insight into the nature of ‘refugees’ to Europe and who they leave behind. Of those living in the tent city, 79.3-per-cent are men, 12.4-per-cent are women, and 8.3-per-cent are children.

This comment appeared in entry 'African Population Explosion - Augurs to Overwhelm Europe' on 07/27/15, 09:36 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

On the globe of my childhood, I was always intrigued by a series of massive bodies of water inland in Western Asia - the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea and what was called on my globe, “The Ural Sea.”

What is more commonly known as “The Aral Sea” was suddenly all but gone one day when I took a look at the map of that area again.

In days to come, it will make for an interesting point of departure on the topic where East meets West. In this case where the ancient silk road and a sea millions of years old was considered by some Soviet planners to be “nature’s mistake”, which needed to make way for a new “cotton road.” Its waters once replete with life to feed and employ local populations was inefficiently diverted to irrigate cotton farms, where those local populations were sent to be slave labor; and the sea that once sustained them and their now destitute, desert communities, turned into carcenogenic, windswept sand.

The fishing towns that lined the borders of the Aral Sea were once a showpiece of the Soviet Union’s industrial might. The sea was so teeming with life that sailors could pull ashore 50,000 tons of fish a year, bringing resources and economic opportunity to the communities that worked on its shores (Pearce 109). Located on the border between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, the Aral Sea has transformed from one of the four largest lakes in the world to perhaps the world’s greatest environmental disaster. In under half a century, water diversion projects and mismanagement have reduced the Aral to less than 10% of its original surface area. Formerly productive fishing towns now sit in the middle of a salty desert. Populations are plagued with chronic anemia from salty tap water and a plethora of respiratory conditions brought on by the pesticides that once resided on the sea floor are now carried across the land by desert winds. To suggest that the disappearance of the Aral Sea was an unforeseen consequence of Soviet era engineering is an outright falsehood. Many scientific and political leaders in the former Soviet Union believed the Aral Sea to be a mistake of nature and a waste of water resources.

This comment appeared in entry 'Europeans, Asians and racial ambiguity: where to draw the lines?' on 07/27/15, 01:11 PM. (go to entry to post a reply)

This comment appeared in entry 'The logic of capitalism; the unemployed and the superfluous' on 07/27/15, 10:29 AM. (go to entry to post a reply)

Guessedworker wrote:

From a ground-floor reply posted by someone named DavidPeppiatt at the Democracy Forum this morning, to a poster arguing, in essence, for civic nationalism and multiracialism:

Nationalism endeavours to cohere all the interests in society. It recognises the individual not as an entity oppressed by power, class, and circumstance (to be released by a coarsely interpreted but always notional act of breaking all the bounds, especially including those of Nature) but as a natural part of a natural whole in and through which self-realisation is found in either being or becoming. The purest form is existential, and will concern itself with self-consciousness, natural right and interest, solidarity, and social capital. Its intellectual high priest is Martin Heidegger.

Now, it is no more possible to cohere this nationalism with liberalism than it is to cohere self-consciousness with self-estrangement, or the organic with the artificial, or the authentic with the fake. To put it another way, liberalism acts on the human personality - that part of the psyche which is the product of Time and Place. There is no human presence in personality - quite the opposite - and therefore no genuine freedom to be got out of liberalism. On the other hand, nationalism can, in theory at least, deliver a society of men and women who inhabit their nature quite simply and self-consciously. True freedom, of course, is the freedom in being.

I must add that such a society has to be ethnically homogeneous. The sundering, self-estranging Western model of multiculturalism is only possible in a liberal polity.